Mr. Speaker, since the very start of our engagement in Afghanistan we have been building the institutions of the Afghan government, including better prisons, better training for Afghan authorities and better training for the military. This part of the core of our mission and it is part of the mission that we are particularly proud of.

Ted MenziesConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, how exciting to have a question on the economy in the House of Commons, more than a week after we tabled budget 2010.

In answer to that question, the office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer was established by the Conservative government. There never was this office before, so we welcome this sort of discussion and debate on the floor of the House of Commons.

However, the Parliamentary Budget Officer said that these predictions were not prudent. That is in direct conflict with what 15 of Canada's top economists--

Mr. Speaker, the Parliamentary Budget Officer agreed with the economists.

Whenever any officer of Parliament or public servant questions any action of the government, the Conservatives respond viciously, as if the person were an enemy of the state. They fired Linda Keen. They smeared Richard Colvin. Now when Kevin Page dares to suggest the government is too rosy in its forecasts, the finance minister lashes out with a totally erroneous hissy fit.

Ted MenziesConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, I see that the hon. member for Markham—Unionville is using the same talking points he used on the CBC last night, verbatim.

Let me quote an individual, and this is a reflection and a quote after the budget directly to that point, if the hon. member would care to listen. The quote is from Craig Wright from RBC. I believe the hon. member might know that group. He said, “I think we're seeing a number of factors moving in the right direction.... I would think consensus is moving higher, not lower.... I would argue that the budget forecasts were probably on the prudent side”.

Mr. Speaker, pensioners are suffering but the government will not listen.

While the Conservatives were AWOL, Liberals were working. We listened to the concerns of pensioners and we proposed well-studied ideas for pension reform, and the provinces agreed. These included a supplementary CPP, preferred status for pensioners on long-term disability, and allowing employees of bankrupt companies to grow their pensions through the CPP.

Ted MenziesConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, welcome to the file. The Liberals are finally waking up to the fact that we have concerned Canadians who want answers about their pensions.

Let me remind those hon. members what this government has actually done. The finance minister intervened in two Canadian companies that were having financial problems because of their pensions. The finance minister acted quickly and probably saved hundreds of thousands of lost pensions.

The Liberals claim we have done nothing, and they have had a half-day conference.

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives missed a chance to leave a legacy for pensioners in the budget last week. They ignored pension reform, attacked seniors' savings and, instead, they gave them a balloon to celebrate Seniors' Day, a day off they cannot even afford to take.

Why is the government focused on gimmicks rather than real pension reform? How long do pensioners have to wait?

Ted MenziesConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, even in the Liberals' half-day conference they might have been reminded that on October 27, 2009, we put in credible changes that were required for federally regulated private pension plans. We enhanced protection for plan members, reduced funding volatility, made it easier for participants to negotiate, and improved the framework for defined benefit pension plans.

We have received nothing in the form of good suggestions from the opposition.

Mr. Speaker, the budget is clear. The government intends to move forward with its plan to create a single securities commission. The financial and political elite of Toronto have banded together to bring the headquarters of the organization to their city, which just shows that the feds have much more than an economic plan in mind. It is an attack on Montreal.

This Conservative government claims to respect the jurisdictions of Quebec. Why does it not recognize that securities fall under Quebec's jurisdiction?

Mr. Speaker, the member knows that this is not the first time this subject has come up. We talked about it during the last session of Parliament, and once again, our desire to have a single securities commission in Canada was in the throne speech.

That said, the Bloc must note that the provinces are not required to participate. If they do not want to, they will not be required. I think that we also have the right to manage this country and to offer protection to taxpayers for their securities.

Mr. Speaker, it is also our responsibility to protect Canadians when they make investments. As former Minister of National Revenue, I saw some situations where people had gotten hurt, where they had been robbed and swindled out of their earnings.

It is time to clean things up. It is time to have a national securities commission, and I repeat, Quebec will not be required to join the commission if it chooses not to.

Mr. Speaker, the government has always maintained that it did not know that the prisoners it was transferring to Afghan authorities might be tortured. We have learned that as early as 2006, several NATO partners, knowing the reputation of Afghan prisons, tried to assume direct responsibility for Afghan detainees specifically so they would not be tortured.

Canada was absent in these efforts with its NATO partners, and is this not proof of its indifference to the fate of the Afghan prisoners?

Mr. Speaker, this reporting is not new, nor has it surprised anyone in the House that almost three years ago we acted on the advice of senior officials to put in place a new transfer arrangement that improved upon the arrangement that was lacking, and left in place by the previous government. As a result, we have invested more in Afghan prisons, in officials, in training, and mentoring and monitoring. We are trying to improve a situation that I think everyone acknowledges is very difficult, something that we have been aware of for some time.

Mr. Speaker, the truth of the matter is that any time we have been aware of credible evidence, we have acted. We have acted responsibly, and I think we can all say with great pride that what the members of the Canadian Forces, our diplomats, and aid workers in Afghanistan did then and continue to do now is their level best to improve the situation. We can all be proud of that. But here is what Eugene Lang, the former chief of staff to two Liberal defence ministers, had to say: “The...government improved the agreement. The concerns that Ms. Olexiuk raised and the provisions that she apparently at that time had argued for were indeed put in the agreement by the” current government.

Mr. Speaker, since the earthquake in January, members of Canada's Haitian community have been worried about the fate of their loved ones in Haiti.

The Government of Quebec has used its powers under the 1991 Canada-Quebec agreement on the selection and settlement of immigrants to be more flexible about sponsoring families. In fact, the Government of Quebec has decided to temporarily broaden the concept of family reunification.

Rick DykstraConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration

Mr. Speaker, in fact this government has acted. Immediately after the earthquake hit Haiti, this government insisted that all of the sponsorship cases in the queue at the Ministry of Citizenship and Immigration be removed from that queue and be turned into a priority, and which this government and ministry have been working on since the time of the earthquake.

Rick DykstraConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration

Mr. Speaker, the government is completely and fully aware of exactly what its responsibilities are, and also what its needs are in terms of delivering the service. This government has in fact gone out of its way to ensure that we were the first country to be there in Haiti, the first country to provide assistance, the first country to make sure we were there when needed. In fact there is no way we can treat one country in one circumstance differently from another country in a different circumstance. We have dealt with this issue and we continue to deal with this issue.

Mr. Speaker, what the parliamentary secretary just said is scandalous. I am going to take him to see the Haitian community in my riding, and we will see whether things can be done differently.

Yesterday, the cat got out of the bag. The government had promised to create a special fund to help the victims in Haiti, in addition to the money already committed. It was going to match the donations people made and spend the money quickly in the field to meet the urgent needs of Haitians. We are talking about $128 million.

But nothing has happened. Not only has the money in this fund not been spent, but it may wind up in the World Bank.

Why did the government deceive Canadians and Quebeckers, who made a huge effort and worked day and night to raise money, thinking that the government was going to do its part?

Jim AbbottConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Cooperation

Mr. Speaker, the member continues to disappoint us with that kind of question.

The fact is that the Government of Canada committed $85 million immediately for urgent relief. In addition to the $85 million, the matching funds are currently being assessed as to the most effective way that they can be distributed.

I regret that the member has decided to play politics on the back of the Haitian disaster.